are wizards gimped?

[Bumamgar]

Yeah, even after the DoT-stacking patch of 2002, various dot/debuff combo spells still didn't stack, only pure DoTs. For example, Dooming Darkness wouldn't stack if cast by multiple players, since it has a snare component. But Ignite Blood would stack (after the patch), since it's just a straight DoT with no debuff.

I suspect Asystole does not stack, due to the STR/AC debuff, but I could be wrong.

[xorbier]

We've clearly established Rangers are the top dps! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You all have made some good points. I was just responding to the general "Wizards are gimped/suck" statements which were simply absurd.

Don't get me wrong i love mages and necros and enjoy having them in my groups. I just hate when people generalize and make false statements to build up their class.

It is true mages are OP in classic, but when I decided to create a wizard as one of my characters I was thinking more long term for the Kunark and Velious releases and the role i would play in raids. I personally find the role of a wizard more fun on raids and thus why i have one.

I'd love to see actual data that supports what some people are saying though about wizards having one of the lowest sustained/overall dps. I know in my groups i do at least 1/3 or more of the dmg per mob and I find it hard to believe.

"The bad
1)Lowest sustained DPS of the DPS classes under most conditions"

Data to support this!?!??!?!?!?!

[Gandite]

OP I'm a wizard so let me dispell some of this horseshit.

I have always consistently been able to out DPS a mage. This usually happens when I'm single or quad-kiting and some mage walks up looking for some mobs. I've never had a problem stealing my kill back from a mage.

The other thing about mages is they are great while you level, but once you get your mage to 50 you might as well go ahead and roll a class that is useful for something other than leveling to 50. A mage is great at leveling himself and farming crap to give to the character you actually want to play.

The life of a wizard is pretty rough. I've died countless times doing silly stuff. I've also died countless times helping people, soloing, grouping etc etc. Soloing as a wizard is not impossible however it does carry a lot of risks. Quadkiting is also very possible but quite difficult even with jboots and a levitation cloak. I don't have my temp flux staff so it could be easier, but I know it won't be by much.

Should you roll a wizard? Probably not.

[Weekapaug]

I played a wiz in the original classic era and, it was pretty tough going, but like anything in EQ one man's hell is another's fun. I had a great time with the class and, even though conventional wisdom was that mages way out DPSed us, I never had problems with groups anymore than anyone else did at the time.

Ironicly, the thing that put me off of the class and caused a reroll around the time Kunark came out and I was closing in on 50 was the fact that I pretty much had him maxxed out INT and as much +mana as I could get with readily accessible gear (200 was the stat cap then...here?) and anything better I either couldnt afford to buy and certainly never could win a roll for. I succumbed to "grass is always greener-ism" because of bad luck, basicly...the whole time I never could win rolls or afford the few upgrades I could get, my melee friends were having the time of their lives upgrading every slot every other week, it seemed. This got old after months and months....I think the best item I ever won a roll for on that toon was a Sup Pack in Guk and 3 people in the group already had one....On a toon that had 90 days /played on his first birthday. So while I had fun playing him, EQ is a gear-centered game and never getting any useful gear really knocks the fun off fast...

So I twinked and rolled up a SK who remained my main until luclin. I said "Ironicly" above, because, while I loved my SK also, I got him levelled up just in time for the dark days of hybrids during Kunark, when it became known that we brought a 40% exp pentalty to the group. Plus the perception at the time was that warriors were better group tanks than knights anyway, so why would any sane group bother with them when exp was at a crawl as it was? Meanwhile, wizzes were really coming into their own during that era, and even getting OP abilities nerfed, if I recall correctly.

I get into all of that, in case any of it sounds familiar....If you aren't enjoying your wiz, really have a look at why. Is it really the class, or just where it fits into the game at this particular time? Or some other reason like my bad luck that just exaserbates the fact that classic era isn't really the golden age of wizzes in this game, but little more than that? Regardless, I would examine it from a personal gameplay standpoint rather than comparisons to other classes. Other classes are always going to do things better and other players of the same class may also...What's important is how much fun you are having with it.

[Bumamgar]

XP penalties on hybrids and other classes never affected 'the group'. They only affected the player.

[Weekapaug]

Originally Posted by Bumamgar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

XP penalties on hybrids and other classes never affected 'the group'. They only affected the player.

That may or may not be true, but the perception at the time, at least on Bertoxx, was that they did. My hind quarter is still sore from sitting around LFG while all that was going on.

Actually, now I'm going to have to go look that up....it's amazing the trivia we can retain for 10 years about a computer game, yet not remember half the grocery list 20 mins after leaving the house, eh? lol

[Hoggen]

Hybrids did nerf group exp for much of classic. Wizards sucked until Kunark when they were sought after by the brave who put together AE exp groups. Their nukes were resisted too much and the mana requirements were too high to make them anywhere near as useful as druids with manastones. I played a wizard till PoP and finally gave up. They didn't do crap for them till SoF, then they made them retarded with instanukes. Classic wiz is basically a port mule with limited utility in AE situations and for dragons in Velious with Dragonbane.

My experience with mages was only by observation. They didn't seem to be much in demand for groups, likely because of pet control issues, and without a pet, wizards were better, but most preferred melee groups with the occasional ench or druid that knew their class, which was extremely rare for druids. Most druids nuked till they died and never memmed a heal. It was the class of idiots.

[Weekapaug]

Originally Posted by Weekapaug [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, now I'm going to have to go look that up...

I knew I wasn't losing my mind. From the producer's letter dated 01/14/01:


I think that it would be appropriate to say that most players are aware that there are different experience requirements for advancement based upon the race and class you choose to play. Ogres, for instance, require more experience to level than Halflings, and Shadowknights require more experience to level than Warriors. As such, an Ogre Shadowknight requires FAR more experience to level than a Halfling Warrior does. What some people have discovered is that when in a group, everyone shares in this penalty. Before getting into our plan, I think that its important to talk about what our goals were regarding experience penalties and the group sharing in that penalty.

When EverQuest player characters were being designed, it was immediately apparent that some races and classes would be more powerful than others given versatility and other factors. Later, it came to light that the concept of being "more powerful" began to break down at the upper levels, given that everyone capped at the same level. We could not let any one race or class be immensely more powerful than another at that final point, as it would essentially put parts of the game off limits to those who chose the less powerful classes. While we did a good job of making races vary in power, but not so much as to be unbalancing, the same could not be said for classes. Still, though classes would be roughly equivalent in regard to the compelling reason to play them through versatility, the experience penalties were kept.

In regards to the sharing of the experience penalty, it was apparent in beta, before the penalty was shared, that those playing characters without an experience penalty leveled faster than those that did. It was obvious that this would occur, but it was to the extreme that a group of friends, all playing together, would become separated to the point that they could no longer group efficiently in the mid to upper-mid levels. So we chose to distribute experience in the group on the basis of the total experience of each member rather than the level, in order to keep groups together.

As such, a level 20 Troll SK, having more experience total than a Human Wizard of the same level, would get more experience from each kill, while the total experience for the kill was unchanged. Essentially, the SK would take part of the Wizard's share were everything distributed equally to begin with.

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/edit...rs_letter.html

It also mentions a racial penalty that was shared with the group also. Completely forgot about that.

[odizzido]

Originally Posted by xorbier [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

"The bad
1)Lowest sustained DPS of the DPS classes under most conditions"

Data to support this!?!??!?!?!?!

I don't have hard data, but as someone who has played a mage, necro, and wiz to 40+ this is what I have noticed.

[Omnimorph]

Originally Posted by Weekapaug [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I knew I wasn't losing my mind. From the producer's letter dated 01/14/01:


I think that it would be appropriate to say that most players are aware that there are different experience requirements for advancement based upon the race and class you choose to play. Ogres, for instance, require more experience to level than Halflings, and Shadowknights require more experience to level than Warriors. As such, an Ogre Shadowknight requires FAR more experience to level than a Halfling Warrior does. What some people have discovered is that when in a group, everyone shares in this penalty. Before getting into our plan, I think that its important to talk about what our goals were regarding experience penalties and the group sharing in that penalty.

When EverQuest player characters were being designed, it was immediately apparent that some races and classes would be more powerful than others given versatility and other factors. Later, it came to light that the concept of being "more powerful" began to break down at the upper levels, given that everyone capped at the same level. We could not let any one race or class be immensely more powerful than another at that final point, as it would essentially put parts of the game off limits to those who chose the less powerful classes. While we did a good job of making races vary in power, but not so much as to be unbalancing, the same could not be said for classes. Still, though classes would be roughly equivalent in regard to the compelling reason to play them through versatility, the experience penalties were kept.

In regards to the sharing of the experience penalty, it was apparent in beta, before the penalty was shared, that those playing characters without an experience penalty leveled faster than those that did. It was obvious that this would occur, but it was to the extreme that a group of friends, all playing together, would become separated to the point that they could no longer group efficiently in the mid to upper-mid levels. So we chose to distribute experience in the group on the basis of the total experience of each member rather than the level, in order to keep groups together.

As such, a level 20 Troll SK, having more experience total than a Human Wizard of the same level, would get more experience from each kill, while the total experience for the kill was unchanged. Essentially, the SK would take part of the Wizard's share were everything distributed equally to begin with.

Last time I invite an ogre / troll SK to my group! it's gonna be me, halfling cleric, halfling rogue, halfling everything else!

Interesting post btw [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]